On Nov 27, 2:34*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:
"Tom Barry" wrote ...

Boris to announce today. Bye bye public transport improvements, hello
happy petrolheads.

Happy for a week or two. Then the penny will drop. Back to all day
queues at Kensington Church Street. Hoist With Their Own Petar.

Plus more income (and less congestion) in the original zone.

Lager and crisps all round!

Quite. As a resident of northeast London who works in central London, i'm
happy that inner-west Londoners will be discouraged from driving into my
bit of the city, and quite content to watch them stew in their own juice
in theirs.

There is talk of a loss of 70 million in charge revenue, though. I'd like
to see this made up by increasing the central charge, but there's no
prospect of that happening, so i suppose it'll have to come out of the
budgets for public transport, cycling, and black lesbian mime groups or
whoever it is that Boris hates this week.

I was never really in favour of the congestion charge, although I was
in favour of what it was trying to achieve, ie stop selfish people in
cars from clogging the streets. Trouble was that it was a bit
indiscriminate in who it affected.

But I saw a news item with totally spurious complaints from
campaigners against the charge.

Like one owner of a takeaway saying that people didn't drive there
because of the charge, but what time of day do people drive to
takeways?

And even sillier, people claiming that it was stopping people going to
Portobello Road market. Were they seriously claiming that everyone
should drive there and park in the area (or ever did)?

Interesting thought that people who had paid that charge would then
continue to central London. I hadn't thought of that, but it might
improve things if it wasn't for all the roadworks that are making bus
travel impossible at the moment.

"RobWilton" wrote
--------------------------------
What a terrible waste of public funds this all is, Ken ...
...jailed for life.

What a nice, reasonable chap. *plonk*

"Actually, one council, Hammersmith and Fulham, did urge its residents
to
write in and support abolition, which in itself rather biases it -
I'm
not sure if the retention camp could call upon similar public
resources. "

As a resident of that Borough, I was not aware that the council has
urged that course of action on us, but I am glad that they did, and I
certainly voted for the abolition of the Extension: maybe it's
selfish, but this has something to do with not wanting Wandsworth
Bridge Road jammed up all day with traffic by-passing the Extension!

Marc.

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:

"Tom Barry" wrote ...

Boris to announce today. Bye bye public transport improvements,
hello happy petrolheads.

Happy for a week or two. Then the penny will drop. Back to all day
queues at Kensington Church Street. Hoist With Their Own Petar.

Plus more income (and less congestion) in the original zone.

Lager and crisps all round!

Quite. As a resident of northeast London who works in central London,
i'm happy that inner-west Londoners will be discouraged from driving
into my bit of the city, and quite content to watch them stew in
their own juice in theirs.

Stew in what juice? Most of the extension was ridiculously quiet before the
CC was extended.

There is talk of a loss of 70 million in charge revenue, though. I'd
like to see this made up by increasing the central charge, but
there's no prospect of that happening, so i suppose it'll have to
come out of the budgets for public transport, cycling, and black
lesbian mime groups or whoever it is that Boris hates this week.

Yeah, that cycle-hating *******.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...ke_667500n.jpg
http://themotorreport.com.au/wp-cont...ing-a-bike.jpg
http://www.everydaycycling.com/web/M...ON_BIKE_DR.JPG
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/20...is-johnson.jpg
http://www.marinbikes.com/cms/_image...in-bike_v2.jpg

In article
, MIG
writes

And even sillier, people claiming that it was stopping people going to
Portobello Road market. Were they seriously claiming that everyone
should drive there and park in the area (or ever did)?

I did, when I lived in, er, Marylebone.

In any case, the market's main day is Saturday when no charge applies.
--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com

On 28 Nov, 11:29, congokid wrote:
In article
, MIG
writes

And even sillier, people claiming that it was stopping people going to
Portobello Road market. *Were they seriously claiming that everyone
should drive there and park in the area (or ever did)?

I did, when I lived in, er, Marylebone.

In any case, the market's main day is Saturday when no charge applies.

Indeed, making the complaint that much more spurious.

I suspect that many people who claim that they've lost business due to
the charge will find that they were losing business anyway.

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:

"Tom Barry" wrote ...

Boris to announce today. Bye bye public transport improvements,
hello happy petrolheads.

Happy for a week or two. Then the penny will drop. Back to all day
queues at Kensington Church Street. Hoist With Their Own Petar.

Plus more income (and less congestion) in the original zone.

Lager and crisps all round!

Quite. As a resident of northeast London who works in central London,
i'm happy that inner-west Londoners will be discouraged from driving
into my bit of the city, and quite content to watch them stew in
their own juice in theirs.

Stew in what juice? Most of the extension was ridiculously quiet before the
CC was extended.

Er, well, steam in their own juice then. You need less of it.

There is talk of a loss of 70 million in charge revenue, though. I'd
like to see this made up by increasing the central charge, but
there's no prospect of that happening, so i suppose it'll have to
come out of the budgets for public transport, cycling, and black
lesbian mime groups or whoever it is that Boris hates this week.

Yeah, that cycle-hating *******.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...ke_667500n.jpg
http://themotorreport.com.au/wp-cont...ing-a-bike.jpg
http://www.everydaycycling.com/web/M...ON_BIKE_DR.JPG
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/20...is-johnson.jpg
http://www.marinbikes.com/cms/_image...in-bike_v2.jpg

Oh, he rides a bike. That means his policies must be good for cyclists.

Oh no, wait.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-boris-johnson
http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3613
http://www.channel4.com/news/article...gerous/1829747

And i have yet to hear a peep out of him about reducing the danger posed
by HGVs.

Still, here's a splendid article by the Great Helmsman:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...mment.politics

Apparently bendies are "odious, inhuman, socialistic 18-metre Frankfurter
buses". Perhaps he thinks that they're inherently communist because
they're red? Oh, and "the greatest menace, much more lethal than the
motorcar, is the catatonically oblivious pedestrian, in particular the
foreign tourist". He's right, of course, pedestrians kill and injure far
more cyclists than motor vehicles.

Oh no, wait.

tom

PS Apologies for the number of Grauniad links, by the way.

--
Would you like to remember more?

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:

"Tom Barry" wrote ...

Boris to announce today. Bye bye public transport improvements,
hello happy petrolheads.

Happy for a week or two. Then the penny will drop. Back to all day
queues at Kensington Church Street. Hoist With Their Own Petar.

Plus more income (and less congestion) in the original zone.

Lager and crisps all round!

Quite. As a resident of northeast London who works in central
London, i'm happy that inner-west Londoners will be discouraged
from driving into my bit of the city, and quite content to watch
them stew in their own juice in theirs.

Stew in what juice? Most of the extension was ridiculously quiet
before the CC was extended.

Er, well, steam in their own juice then. You need less of it.

There is talk of a loss of 70 million in charge revenue, though. I'd
like to see this made up by increasing the central charge, but
there's no prospect of that happening, so i suppose it'll have to
come out of the budgets for public transport, cycling, and black
lesbian mime groups or whoever it is that Boris hates this week.

Yeah, that cycle-hating *******.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...ke_667500n.jpg
http://themotorreport.com.au/wp-cont...ing-a-bike.jpg
http://www.everydaycycling.com/web/M...ON_BIKE_DR.JPG
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/20...is-johnson.jpg
http://www.marinbikes.com/cms/_image...in-bike_v2.jpg

Oh, he rides a bike. That means his policies must be good for
cyclists.
Oh no, wait.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-boris-johnson
http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3613
http://www.channel4.com/news/article...gerous/1829747

count to ten and calm down

You accused him of hating cyclists. I pointed out that since he is a cyclist
himself, he probably doesn't. You suggested that since he hasn't devoted all
his time and all his budget to putting cyclists before everyone else, he
obviously does. You are quite wrong. Very wrong. Extremely wrong. In fact,
since feminists use the word "misogynist" to describe anyone who thinks that
maybe people who are not women matter too, and you use the word
"cyclist-hater" to describe anyone who thinks that maybe people who are not
cyclists matter too, you are as wrong as a feminist, and it isn't really
possible to get much wronger than that.

For years space has been taken away from all other people and given to
cyclists. While that was appropiate at some point, it couldn't continue for
ever or the entire earth would be a cycle path. Deciding that the time to
stop the process has been reached now does not make you a cyclist hater.

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:

"Tom Barry" wrote ...

Boris to announce today. Bye bye public transport improvements,
hello happy petrolheads.

Happy for a week or two. Then the penny will drop. Back to all day
queues at Kensington Church Street. Hoist With Their Own Petar.

Plus more income (and less congestion) in the original zone.

Lager and crisps all round!

Quite. As a resident of northeast London who works in central
London, i'm happy that inner-west Londoners will be discouraged
from driving into my bit of the city, and quite content to watch
them stew in their own juice in theirs.

Stew in what juice? Most of the extension was ridiculously quiet
before the CC was extended.

Er, well, steam in their own juice then. You need less of it.

There is talk of a loss of 70 million in charge revenue, though. I'd
like to see this made up by increasing the central charge, but
there's no prospect of that happening, so i suppose it'll have to
come out of the budgets for public transport, cycling, and black
lesbian mime groups or whoever it is that Boris hates this week.

Yeah, that cycle-hating *******.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...ke_667500n.jpg
http://themotorreport.com.au/wp-cont...ing-a-bike.jpg
http://www.everydaycycling.com/web/M...ON_BIKE_DR.JPG
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/20...is-johnson.jpg
http://www.marinbikes.com/cms/_image...in-bike_v2.jpg

Oh, he rides a bike. That means his policies must be good for cyclists.
Oh no, wait.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-boris-johnson
http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3613
http://www.channel4.com/news/article...gerous/1829747

count to ten and calm down

Appreciated!

You accused him of hating cyclists.

Actually, i didn't. The "whoever it is that Boris hates this week" was
attached only to the "black lesbian mime groups", which was itself a
tongue-in-cheek reference to the sort of thing Ken was perenially accused
of wasting money on by the Tories, who presumably did not approve of this.
Apologies for any confusion caused.

I pointed out that since he is a cyclist himself, he probably doesn't.

Agreed. I have no reason to think he hates cyclists.

You suggested that since he hasn't devoted all his time and all his
budget to putting cyclists before everyone else, he obviously does.

That's not what i meant at all. My point was merely that the fact that he
rides a bike himself doesn't automatically mean his policies are good for
cyclists.

You are quite wrong. Very wrong. Extremely wrong. In fact, since
feminists use the word "misogynist" to describe anyone who thinks that
maybe people who are not women matter too, and you use the word
"cyclist-hater" to describe anyone who thinks that maybe people who are
not cyclists matter too, you are as wrong as a feminist, and it isn't
really possible to get much wronger than that.

Noted.

For years space has been taken away from all other people and given to
cyclists. While that was appropiate at some point, it couldn't continue
for ever or the entire earth would be a cycle path. Deciding that the
time to stop the process has been reached now does not make you a
cyclist hater.

As far as i'm concerned, as long as there is any road space in inner
London that is not purely for the use of buses and cycles, it hasn't gone
far enough.

tom

--
This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.